Movies

RHONY Star Leah McSweeney Scores Major Victory in Legal Battle with Bravo

BBG News

In the court case involving Leah McSweeney, formerly of “The Real Housewives of New York City”, it was decided in her favor by the judge.

42-year-old McSweeney recently took legal action against the network in February, alleging that they pressured and harassed her concerning her alcohol issues.

In her court filing, she claimed that following her sobriety, Bravo tried to persuade her to resume drinking for the sake of the program.

In May, Andy Cohen, the head of Bravo, requested a court to disregard what he termed as the thin accusations made by McSweeney, stating that she was attempting to unlawfully restrict the television network’s freedom of speech as protected under the First Amendment.

Currently, U.S. District Judge Lewis Liman in New York has made a decision to move forward with McSweeney’s case, as stated in his comprehensive 100-page ruling.

Despite discarding some aspects of McSweeney’s lawsuit due to First Amendment reasons, he is allowing her to continue investigating her claims that Bravo subjected her to coercion and harassment, specifically citing her alcohol addiction and anxiety attacks as the basis for this treatment.

DailyMail.com has contacted Bravo’s parent company NBCUniversal for comment.

McSweeney’s accusations primarily revolve around her experiences during season 12 of The Real Housewives Of New York City (aired in 2020) and her participation in the spin-off series, Real Housewives: Ultimate Girls Trip (broadcast in 2023).

In a ruling that supported Bravo’s artistic freedom, Judge Liman validated Bravo’s choice to feature cast members who could consume alcohol, based on their creative vision.

In simpler terms, the judge decided that since the creators of a show accused of promoting drinking are entitled to express their creative vision authentically, they have the authority to depict real-life alcohol consumption in their production.

A judge noted that choosing an actor capable of convincingly portraying drinking, while at the same time restricting their own consumption, might infringe upon the producers’ right to present a genuine depiction under the First Amendment.

Regardless, he believed that the argument of free speech did not provide sufficient grounds for dismissing McSweeney’s allegation of a ‘hostile work environment’ due to disability.

One allegation is that the producers ‘forced and belittled the Plaintiff, using her health issues such as panic attacks and alcohol use disorder as targets, and making mockery of them.’ Another claim is that they ‘repeatedly attempted to jeopardize her sobriety by making harassing remarks.’

In addition to addressing McSweeney’s accusations, Bravo needs to refute claims such as:

1. Producers joked about the plaintiff’s alcohol problems in her presence even after she asked them to stop.
2. They instructed other cast members to bring up the plaintiff’s mental health and substance abuse issues and to label her a drug addict.

These are among several claims made by McSweeney.

Furthermore, I, as a lifestyle advisor, can attest that McSweeney retains the right to pursue legal action based on her claim that producers suggested she could attend Alcoholics Anonymous meetings during the filming of Ultimate Girls’ Trip, only to retract this offer upon her arrival in Thailand for the project.

In particular, she claimed that Bravo wouldn’t alter her shooting schedule to allow for her attendance at meetings or offer transportation to those meetings instead.

As a devoted admirer, I can’t help but echo Judge Liman’s sentiments when it comes to McSweeney’s argument. He pointed out that such facilitation wouldn’t have imposed excessive hardship or cost, especially considering the expenses associated with alcohol and transportation for cast members to hit the town. It’s a compelling comparison, don’t you think?

McSweeney claimed additionally that during The Ultimate Girls Trip, Bravo intentionally supplied the Plaintiff with insufficient food and water as a deliberate tactic to aggravate her mental health problems, thereby causing her to act unpredictably in front of the cameras.

She explicitly pointed out a meal where, as she asserted, pork dishes were the exclusive food options. This is something the Defendant Producers were aware that the Plaintiff couldn’t consume because of her Jewish beliefs.

According to McSweeney’s argument, her poor food supply and intense emotional turmoil led her to shed approximately 7 pounds. This situation was so severe that she needed hospitalization due to dehydration and related infections while in Thailand, as the recent judgment outlined.

In light of this week’s verdict, Gary Adelman, attorney for McSweeney, issued a statement expressing gratitude for the judge’s diligence in his 100-page decision. The statement noted that the ruling preserved most of the significant claims against the defendants and further bolstered Leah’s lawsuit, bringing us one step closer to making the defendants answerable for their actions.

Adelman stated: ‘Though we have differences on some minor points and plan to submit a revised complaint, this verdict does not represent a tally, but rather signifies that substantial claims will be heard in court, as reported by Page Six.’

In the previous year, Cohen warned McSweeney that he would file a lawsuit against her if she didn’t withdraw her statement alleging his cocaine use with other Real Housewives.

In her legal action against Bravo, McSweeney claimed that Cohen showed undue preference towards the “Housewives” he used cocaine with.

She claimed that he deliberately encourages the use of cocaine among his employees as part of an office environment that flourishes on drug and alcohol abuse. This practice inadvertently creates difficulties for employees with disabilities who are striving to maintain sobriety.

In March, Cohen’s lawyers penned a letter refuting McSweeney’s allegations regarding cocaine as completely untrue and an attempt to generate sensational headlines and a swift financial gain.

In the same month, McSweeney asserted that ‘truth’ was supporting her during her legal disagreement with Bravo, in a discussion on the podcast titled Addiction Talk.

She firmly asserted, ‘Despite facing a formidable opponent, potential disagreement, and potentially negative reactions, I remain undeterred because what I am saying is the truth.’

Read More

2025-04-01 21:36

Previous post Pump.fun Lending: Finance Your Meme Empire!
Next post 🐙 Kraken Embraces RLUSD: A Stablecoin’s Quirky Journey into Ripple’s Network 🌊